JWBooth
Diamond Member
To reiterate....
Nay
Nay
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have no problem with paying taxes on a purchase - just like the fuel tax the truckers pay. They pay the tax at the point of sale. They don't get home and have to pay the taxes again.
That is not true. Truckers pay International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA).
Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.
The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.
I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.
I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.
ahoy Alan1,
i'll try me hearty.
yer state that ye reside in needs monies fer things. stuffs like takin' care 'o old people...or fixin' roads...or payin' fer yer municipal courts (which we need, since we be a country 'o laws)...or to pay fer state police that keep yer highways free 'o mischief.
a state can't do these things with no monies.
part 'o the way this monies be raised be through sales tax. thar also be things like property tax, or state income tax.
one way or the other, though, the monies has to be raised, because State Government's can't function on just goodwill alone.
aye?
aye.
- MeadHallPirate
Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.
The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.
ahoy and well met Dont Taz Me Bro,
as it relates to state and local governments, the bolded be untrue, matey.
many be starvin' fer monies.
- MeadHallPirate
I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.
ahoy Alan1,
i'll try me hearty.
yer state that ye reside in needs monies fer things. stuffs like takin' care 'o old people...or fixin' roads...or payin' fer yer municipal courts (which we need, since we be a country 'o laws)...or to pay fer state police that keep yer highways free 'o mischief.
a state can't do these things with no monies.
part 'o the way this monies be raised be through sales tax. thar also be things like property tax, or state income tax.
one way or the other, though, the monies has to be raised, because State Government's can't function on just goodwill alone.
aye?
aye.
- MeadHallPirate
Yo-Mead....you forgot about paying those public union pensions.
Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.
The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.
ahoy and well met Dont Taz Me Bro,
as it relates to state and local governments, the bolded be untrue, matey.
many be starvin' fer monies.
- MeadHallPirate
Yo-Mead.....starving to pay for the public union pentions
One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.
One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.
Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.
One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.
Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.
One state will not be compelling a business in another state to collect another states sales tax, the state that the business is located in will be the one to require collection of sales/use tax. If a business is located in FL and the purchaser is in VA, it is VA that will be the one requiring participation of business entities located in VA.
If VA chooses not to participate, then they are free to let businesses continue to operate as they already are. (Of course estimates are that VA will continue to loose out on an estimated $285 Million dollars in revenue, but that is VA's choice.)
>>>>
Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.
One state will not be compelling a business in another state to collect another states sales tax, the state that the business is located in will be the one to require collection of sales/use tax. If a business is located in FL and the purchaser is in VA, it is VA that will be the one requiring participation of business entities located in VA.
If VA chooses not to participate, then they are free to let businesses continue to operate as they already are. (Of course estimates are that VA will continue to loose out on an estimated $285 Million dollars in revenue, but that is VA's choice.)
>>>>
From the text of the Marketplace Fairness Act:
SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF SALES AND USE TAXES.
Each Member State under the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement is authorized to require all sellers not qualifying for the small seller exception described in subsection (c) to collect and remit sales and use taxes with respect to remote sales sourced to that Member State
So the Member State is authorized to force businesses who have sales "sourced" to that member state to collect sales taxes. It has absolutely nothing to do with the home state of the business.
Remember, "sourced" is defined in the Act as "the location to which a remote sale is sourced refers to the location where the item sold is received by the purchaser."
One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.
Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.
ALEXANDRIAThe U.S. Senate on Monday night overwhelmingly passed a bill requiring online retailers to collect sales taxes in the states where their customers live, putting Virginia one step closer to securing the transportation funding for this years General Assembly transportation package.